The Risk of Esophageal Food Impaction In Eosinophilic Esophagitis Patients; The Role of Clinical And Socioeconomic Factors

Background: Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) patients present with dysphagia and often suffer from esophageal food impaction (EFI). EFI can lead to life-threatening perforation, and requires emergent endoscopic intervention. The aim of this study is to evaluate the risk factors for EFI in EoE patients.Methods: This is a retrospective study performed at a tertiary health care system. Medical records and endoscopy images of EoE cases were reviewed. Clinical characteristics and outcomes including EFIs were documented. We used Zip-code median household income as a surrogate for patients’ socioeconomic status.Results: 291 EoE cases were included, mean age was 42 years. Most patients (65%) had classic EoE endoscopic findings including linear furrows and/or concentric rings, however, a significant proportion (47%) had findings suggestive of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), such as the presence of erosive-esophagitis, a hiatal hernia or Schatzki’s ring. 48 patients (16%) developed one or more esophageal food impaction (EFI). The risk of EFI was less likely in the absence of furrows and/or rings; odds ratio (OR) = .28, 95%CI (0.11, 0.72) [P = .008]. Females had less EFI risk; OR = 0.42, 95%CI (0.19, 0.95) [P = .04]. The type of medical insurance and socioeconomic status was not associated with EFI risk.Conclusion: EFI risk is higher in EoE patients with esophageal furrows and/or rings and in men. Aggressive treatment might be required in this population. GERD and EoE can coexist in many patients. Further studies are required to examine the role of the socioeconomic status in EoE complications.

Is There a Role for Topical Swallowed Steroids upon Emergency Room Admission for Suspected Food Bolus Obstruction in Eosinophilic Esophagitis?

Since most pharmacological treatments in case of esophageal food impaction (EFI) are unsuccessful, an endoscopy is usually required to resolve EFI. We present the first results of a budesonide orodispersible tablet (BOT) as a medical treatment option before endoscopy. We evaluated all patients with a suspected EFI to receive BOT before emergent endoscopy at a tertiary hospital between March 2019 and June 2020. A total of eight patients received BOT before endoscopy. Mean age was 50.1 years and 87.5% were male. In 38% (3/8) of patients the EFI resolved without endoscopic intervention. No adverse events occurred. After endoscopy, a diagnosis of EoE was established in 75%. This case series demonstrate the potential of BOT as medical rescue therapy in case of EFI.

Follow-up and symptom persistence after esophageal food impaction

Esophageal food impactions (EFI) are associated with esophageal pathology, most commonly eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). Obtaining biopsies provides opportunity for diagnosis, which is important since treatment of EoE decreases the risk for future EFI. Outpatient follow-up rates remain suboptimal and outcomes of patients without timely follow-up are unknown. We aimed to identify the factors associated with pediatric subspecialty follow-up post-EFI and to determine the symptom burden in patients without follow-up. We performed a retrospective review of patients presenting with EFI at a tertiary children’s hospital between 2010 and 2018. Patients without subspecialty follow-up within 1 year of EFI were included in a prospective telephone survey investigating the barriers to care, outcomes, and symptoms. Clinical characteristics were compared between groups. Multivariate analysis was used to control for multiple variables. There were 127 EFI identified in 123 individuals (73% male, mean age: 12.2 years). Esophageal biopsies were collected in 76% of cases, and 49% of patients had follow-up. Individuals with follow-up were more likely (P ≤ 0.05) to have had biopsies. In a multivariate analysis, written recommendation for follow-up (Odds Ratio: 6.9 [2.4–19.5], P = 0.001) as well as atopic history and identified stricture were associated with a higher likelihood of follow-up. Those without follow-up had subsequent stricture (35%), dilation (44%), or EFI (39%), and 55% (12/22) described ongoing esophageal symptoms. Identification of treatable findings at time of EFI and ongoing symptom burden after EFI support an imperative for follow-up after EFI. Clear recommendations are a modifiable factor that may improve follow-up in this population.

Empiric proton pump inhibitor therapy after esophageal food impaction may mask eosinophilic esophagitis diagnosis at follow-up

Summary Esophageal food impaction (EFI) is often the first presentation for patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE); however, there is significant heterogeneity in the management of EFI. We aimed to study the impact of EFI management, particularly post-EFI medication prescriptions on EoE diagnosis, follow-up, and recurrence in patients with endoscopic features of EoE. In our retrospective study, adults presenting between 2007 and 2017 with EFI requiring endoscopic dis-impaction with endoscopic features of EoE (furrows, rings, and/or exudates) were included. We examined the impact of demographics and EFI management on EoE diagnosis, follow-up (esophagogastroduodenoscopy [EGD] or clinic visit within 6 months), and recurrence. We identified 164 cases of EFI due to suspected EoE. Biopsy was performed in 68 patients (41.5%), and 144 patients (87.8%) were placed on proton pump inhibitor (PPI) and/or swallow corticosteroids after EFI, including 88.5% of those not biopsied. PPI use at time of biopsy was negatively associated with EoE diagnosis (odds ratio: 0.39, confidence interval: 0.17–0.85). Sixty-one (37.4%) patients were lost to follow-up at 6 months. Recurrent EFI at 1 year occurred in 3.7% of patients. Medications, most commonly PPI, are frequently prescribed after EFI when the endoscopic features of EoE are present, which may mask the diagnosis of EoE on follow-up EGD. We estimated that for every five patients biopsied on PPI, one case of EoE is masked. As recurrent EFI within 1 year is uncommon, empiric therapy should be avoided until diagnostic biopsies are obtained. Further efforts to reduce loss to follow-up after EFI are also needed.

A review of optimal evaluation and treatment of suspected esophageal food impaction

Fluoroscopy-guided esophageal disimpaction of ingested food is a safe, effective, and cost-efficient alternative to endoscopically guided disimpaction. Patients with suspected esophageal impaction usually require fluoroscopy to confirm the diagnosis and determine the level of obstruction, which guides further management. Proximal esophageal food impactions at or near the cricopharyngeus muscle require an ENT intervention. Food impactions from the cervical esophagus to the aortic arch require a GI intervention. Obstructions distal to the aortic arch can usually be managed by the radiologist with a fluoroscopy-guided disimpaction. The use of intravenous glucagon to relax the mid and distal esophageal smooth muscle, combined with an effervescent agent, and water comprises this “combination” therapy to relieve an acute esophageal food impaction. This paper reviews the indications, contraindications, technique, and 32 years of experience with fluoroscopy-guided esophageal disimpaction at our institution. A retrospective chart review of our experience includes 252 patients with a 56% success rate that obviated more expensive and invasive procedures. Only one complication of a minor mucosal tear of no clinical consequence was encountered. Radiologists should be familiar with the presentation and management of this common diagnosis.